Baselworld is only a few weeks away. Getting the latest news is easy, Click Here for info on how to join the Watchuseek.com newsletter list. Follow our team for updates featuring event coverage, new product unveilings, watch industry news & more!

The new meter code only displays meters in the list that are detected or have legacy but free support. So it's to be expected that it's not in the list and it should work when it's plugged in

John

I am freshly new in this software, never use before, planning for a virgin trial, so my questions maybe a bit dumb.

In sensor selection upon creating a new file， shall I just select "SIMULATED SENSOR", click the dial with "Create a new meter correction file"? It goes to calibrate the sensor after that, shall I play the DVE color patch on projector as it says and will be able to complete sensor calibration?

P.S. I don't have the sensor yet, planning to buy a i1 display 3. Just want to make sure I can do this before purchase, thanks.

To use the simulated sensor click "no" for calibrate sensor. Then just run any of the measurement sequences, grayscale, primaries, etc. and the program will populate the measurements with dummy data. No projector or meter required.

All have the same look and cost similarily at around USD250. Are they actually the same?

Xrite.com has only one namely i1 display pro, no 3, but most of you were talking about i1 display 3, how come? I am so confused what to look for.

If they look the same, then yes, they are the same meter.

There are however OEM and retail versions (which look the same other than packaging). You won't find the OEM ones on Amazon, but if you see a secondhand one on ebay which doesn't include the box/X-rite software, then it may be an OEM.

There are however OEM and retail versions (which look the same other than packaging). You won't find the OEM ones on Amazon, but if you see a secondhand one on ebay which doesn't include the box/X-rite software, then it may be an OEM.

Big thanks, that clear the hassle. I guess what people calling i1 display 3/pro3 is OEM from Chromapure, the curtpalme.com which is sell in bundle with their software.

I guess what people calling i1 display 3/pro3 is OEM from Chromapure, the curtpalme.com which is sell in bundle with their software.

I have seen those names you mention applied to all of the different variants, not just Chromapure.
Chromapure officially call their enhanced version 'PRO' (all caps).

X-Rite surprised a few people when the product launched without a '3' at the end. Stores already had the item for preorder under those unoffical names and some still do.
Before it was officially released, these were the common names being used to talk about it here, so that is why those names are still being commonly used today.

To use the simulated sensor click "no" for calibrate sensor. Then just run any of the measurement sequences, grayscale, primaries, etc. and the program will populate the measurements with dummy data. No projector or meter required.

I didn't mean to do simulate calibration, I mean doing the actual calibration though. There is no Eye one to select in sensor selection menu, what shall I do?

1) In the preferences menu (General tab), why would you ever put in the option for Use measured colors (when available))? This only leads to an incorrect graph in the Saturation-shifts chart. If this is checked, it makes it looks as though all of the measured 100% saturation points are correct, when they really aren't. It also makes all the other saturation and Hue points on the chart incorrect due to this.

If you want the real position, you must not take "Use measured colors (when available)" in "preferences" and "general".

About the Delta E, it's the same problem IMHO : In "prefrences" and "advanced", if you want the "real delta E", take the option " do not use luminance in Delta E formula".

About saturation adjustment, one "obligation", the white point must be adjusted before all another adjustment on RGBCYM. If you don't do this, target will be false.

If you want the real position, you must not take "Use measured colors (when available)" in "preferences" and "general".

I noticed I had the above item selected but I didn't select it on my own so was that the default setting? If not, there may have been an earlier instruction to check that box or I could have done it accidentally...but it's unchecked now

Couple questions...

When adjusting Grayscale, I have an issue using the 30% screen to adjust RGBLowEnd... Green stays fairly stable. Red bounces the most... by as much as 13 percentage points. Blue also bounces but not as much. No issue when I use the 80% screen to adjust RGBHighEnd. Is this typical or is there a problem somewhere?

The CurtPalme instructions for adjusting the Color Control using the AVS HD 709 test disc says to first select the "100% Gray window" to get the Y (luminance or brightness) reading... but it must really mean the "100% White window"... correct?

No matter what I try... I cannot get Red color level within a reasonable distance. Following instructions, I end up with Red at 0.015 distance from reference, and after much tweaking the best I can do is 0.013 distance from reference. Any comments or suggesstions because I'm debating on making a change in the Service Menu of the display (Panny P60ST30) to see if I can nudge it a little closer. Surprisingly Blue and Green are within 0.003 distance from reference.

Thanks for the link, I hadn't seen that rack-up before. The i1d3 variability results are truly impressive. I think the best approach for plasma users of the d3 will be to get hold of a correction matrix based on a high-end spectrometer but I don't know any DiYers who have one. Barring that the i1pro would be the next best choice, although I was a bit surprised by the mean dE2000 of ~4 for the white point comparison between the i1pro and the reference.

I might have one. I came to this thread looking to figure out how to use my calibrated d3 in HCFR. I need to look at your posts to see how to do all this.

My d3 is an OEM meter from ChromaPure and I'm curious to see if measurements taken with HCFR and CP agree. My certificate of calibration shows WRGB corrections for several types of TV. As you may recall we have the same plasma Samsung 51D8000.

The corrections are all xy format, and the biggest correction for any of the TVs is 0.011. This is the only correction >0.010

For plasma the max is 0.007 and 3 of the 8 corrections are 0.000.

So now to look at the matrix you posted and see if the fact I only have xy correction (no Y, but I think I saw on the CP thread that Y was very accurate.) Also need to see if I have to convert to XYZ as I notice that is what HCFR calls for ...

I might have one. I came to this thread looking to figure out how to use my calibrated d3 in HCFR. I need to look at your posts to see how to do all this.

My d3 is an OEM meter from ChromaPure and I'm curious to see if measurements taken with HCFR and CP agree. My certificate of calibration shows WRGB corrections for several types of TV. As you may recall we have the same plasma Samsung 51D8000.

The corrections are all xy format, and the biggest correction for any of the TVs is 0.011. This is the only correction >0.010

For plasma the max is 0.007 and 3 of the 8 corrections are 0.000.

So now to look at the matrix you posted and see if the fact I only have xy correction (no Y, but I think I saw on the CP thread that Y was very accurate.) Also need to see if I have to convert to XYZ as I notice that is what HCFR calls for ...

Too late tonight.

What are the WRGB xy corrections for your plasma? -0.007x appears to be typical (and smaller for y), Y corrections are not really necessary.

What are the WRGB xy corrections for your plasma? -0.007x appears to be typical (and smaller for y), Y corrections are not really necessary.

You mean for my D3? It is that "plasma" was listed as one of the 10 display types my probe was tested against. Not bad, really considering that at most they would round to only 0.01 adjustment. Results below; checked 3 times.

W: 0.007, 0.000
R: 0.007, -0.004
G: 0.006, -0.006
B: 0.000, 0.000

Do you know how to use these to create an XYZ matrix that will work in HCFR?

I made a spreadsheet to convert xyY to XYZ using 'correct to spec' Y values (W: 1.0, R: 0.213, G: 0.715, B: 0.072)

Here is what I get for WHITE. You can see that x correction was 0.007 and y correction was 0.000. Would I use the XYZ for the reference probe?

Im missing the posibility to adjust my reed time. I can generate the same problem with the old HCFR, and the spyder 3 if i put the read time to 1000ms. normaly i run with 3000ms.

Or is that option relocated.?

The argyll drivers that we now use don't have direct support for changing the read time. I'm surprised you're seeing issues at higher light levels, what meter options did you pick and would it be possible to send the stderr.log file.

Things have been quiet recently, there is some work going however there are a couple of annoying memory and compatibility issues that are preventing a release at the moment, I hope to get to the bottom of these soon.

You mean for my D3? It is that "plasma" was listed as one of the 10 display types my probe was tested against. Not bad, really considering that at most they would round to only 0.01 adjustment. Results below; checked 3 times.

W: 0.007, 0.000
R: 0.007, -0.004
G: 0.006, -0.006
B: 0.000, 0.000

Do you know how to use these to create an XYZ matrix that will work in HCFR?

I made a spreadsheet to convert xyY to XYZ using 'correct to spec' Y values (W: 1.0, R: 0.213, G: 0.715, B: 0.072)

Here is what I get for WHITE. You can see that x correction was 0.007 and y correction was 0.000. Would I use the XYZ for the reference probe?

Did you ask Tom for the correction matrix? I don't think you can back it out unless you have the reference points it was corrected to. The nice thing about these probes though is they have very little unit to unit variability. I measured the correction for white against my i1pro2 yesterday and it was 0.0078 for x\t and -0.0012 for y. Plus the fact that the corrections are small I think if you use a 4-color correction built from my i1pro2 your errors will be small enough. It may also be possible to read the corrections using the probe driver, you'd have to ask Graeme about that.

@JohnAD - What's is HCFR's matrix correction algorithm right now? The one in the attached paper is better than rms based algorithms.

Did you ask Tom for the correction matrix? I don't think you can back it out unless you have the reference points it was corrected to. The nice thing about these probes though is they have very little unit to unit variability. I measured the correction for white against my i1pro2 yesterday and it was 0.0078 for x and -0.0012 for y. Plus the fact that the corrections are small I think if you use a 4-color correction built from my i1pro2 your errors will be small enough. It may also be possible to read the corrections using the probe driver, you'd have to ask Graeme about that.

@JohnAD - What's is HCFR's matrix correction algorithm right now? The one in the attached paper is better than rms based algorithms.

The reference points I provided next to my meter measures are what they provided. You can see that the correction for white x is. 007, y is 0.

I am also confused when searching the i1 on ebay and amazon.com, there are 3 names when I search i1 display,

1. i1 display 3
2. i1 display pro 3
3. i1 display pro

All have the same look and cost similarily at around USD250. Are they actually the same?

Xrite.com has only one namely i1 display pro, no 3, but most of you were talking about i1 display 3, how come? I am so confused what to look for.

Will both the retail and the OEM version of the i1 display will work with the new version of HCFR? I'm considering upgrading my d2, but the OEM must be purchased with Chromapure or CalMan. At this point, with the add on licenses price is just getting out of my affordability range for a hobby. I can likely get a retail version for @ $210-$250, where as $420-$589 is the OEM with CP or CM software.

oh, ok - if you have all the measured and reference locations (and using z=1-x-y) then solve kr and km using eqns. 6 and 7. Then plug the k's into eqns. 1 and 3 and finally solve for R with eqn. 8.

OK, this is my first try with matrix math. Here is what I did.

Instead of just using the xy values for WRGB as measured for the two probes, I 'assumed' the reference probe was at Rec709 spec. I then used the correction I was given to create the WRGB xy values that my probe would measure.

Example: white x correction was .007 and y correction was 0 based on .309/.329 for my D3 and .316/.329 for the reference . So I 'shifted' reference to Rec709 spec and used .313/.329 and for my 'measured' probe I used .306/.329. When my probe reads .306/.329 the white point is actually spot on at .313/.329. I don't know enough about matrix math to know if this creates an error, but since those are actually the measurements that would be obtained, I was thinking it wouldn't matter. It just helped me 'see' what I had to do about my measurements in the matrices.

So, after going through my maiden voyage into matrix math, Google and I came up with this final value for R. I had some difficulty deciding how to do in Eqn. 8 the ^ -1. The matrix below is based on this interpretation:

R = Nrgb x (Mrgb ^ -1)

and not R = (Nrgb x Mrgb)^ -1

For those who have seen these corrections entered, does this look like a reasonable one given the xy corrections I've already posted for WRGB?

The argyll drivers that we now use don't have direct support for changing the read time. I'm surprised you're seeing issues at higher light levels, what meter options did you pick and would it be possible to send the stderr.log file.

Thanks

John

I tested different meter options, same result. Im 99,9% sure it will be fixed with longer read time. For sure it is not usable at all like this with spyder 4 over 50% IRE.

ill try get somone to help me finding those files for you.. im no good at that stuff..

Instead of just using the xy values for WRGB as measured for the two probes, I 'assumed' the reference probe was at Rec709 spec. I then used the correction I was given to create the WRGB xy values that my probe would measure.

Example: white x correction was .007 and y correction was 0 based on .309/.329 for my D3 and .316/.329 for the reference . So I 'shifted' reference to Rec709 spec and used .313/.329 and for my 'measured' probe I used .306/.329. When my probe reads .306/.329 the white point is actually spot on at .313/.329. I don't know enough about matrix math to know if this creates an error, but since those are actually the measurements that would be obtained, I was thinking it wouldn't matter. It just helped me 'see' what I had to do about my measurements in the matrices.

I don't follow why you are assuming anything, you have the actual measured and reference points. The x,y shifts will be different depending on where you are in the gamut, that's why you need the matrix.

Quote:

So, after going through my maiden voyage into matrix math, Google and I came up with this final value for R. I had some difficulty deciding how to do in Eqn. 8 the ^ -1. The matrix below is based on this interpretation:

R = Nrgb x (Mrgb ^ -1)

and not R = (Nrgb x Mrgb)^ -1

For those who have seen these corrections entered, does this look like a reasonable one given the xy corrections I've already posted for WRGB?

1.024 0.000 0.000
0.000 0.994 0.000
0.000 0.000 0.987

Your interpretation of where the inverse goes is correct but all matrix entries should have a non-zero entry so something didn't work. If you want a shortcut plug the measured and reference points in HCFR and it will do the calculation for you.

This new version of HCFR with my new Spyder Pro 4 is a awesome setup.
Over the years ,I have being preforming lots of different calibrations on my LG 47 LCD and it never look this good.
I too had the problem of the meter not showing up in the drop down list.
After some hours, I realize that Windows was automatically loading a driver that the program will not see the meter.
I went to the Device manager and pointed to the driver in the HCFR folder.
It worked !!
Thank you so much for this software update.
John G

ok, cool, and it computes the Y correction too. So what does it do with the secondaries measurements as they are not needed?

There are 2 places where a correction is made, the matrix correction/meter calibration code within HCFR which uses a (currently slightly broken) 4 colour method and the ccss code in argyll for the i3pro which uses a least squares method. The first lot of code doesn't use secondaries.